If you're wondering, by the way, how you missed out on this during the election, don't worry, you didn't. Exposing Drever is part of the project of a dedicated group of conservatives who have been performing the investigation into the NDP candidates that the media neglected to do (even as the polls hinted at an NDP majority government). Apparently voters in Calgary-Bow weren't particularly interested in their candidate either, not bothering to research her dubious (for the SJW-class) poses on album covers nor her horrible (for the sane people in the audience) political views.

Not only were the horrible NDP candidates like Drever, faggot Michael Connolly, and fascist-dictator loving Rod Loyola elected without the slightest amount of scrutiny by either the media nor the electorate, but what was revealed during the election didn't seem to matter one lick for the party's overall support. Is there a single person who didn't vote for Rachel Arab's NDP because they found out her candidates thought Hugo Chavez and his brutal dictatorship was a model worth emulating in Alberta?

In other words, that same sentiment would have put Wildrose in power in 2012. Call it a victim of bad timing, whatever you like, but don't you dare claim that it was because Albertans were "worried about extremists in the party". They weren't worried about extremists like Rod Loyola or David Eggen.

If you claim that you did have a problem with Hunsperger in Wildrose, and you voted NDP in the last election, YOU ARE A LIAR. You're lying to me, you're lying to yourself, you're lying to Albertans. Just try to claim otherwise, you pathetic liar. If you shrug off Drever then you shrug off Hunsperger, and if you are upset that Drever got in then you implicitly agree that the majority didn't mind her and therefore Hunsperger either.

All in all, the 2015 Alberta election serves as a giant redemption of Allan Hunsperger. Danielle Smith owes him an apology, as does every left-wing media member who trumpeted up his story then tried claiming that they were helping Albertans identify an "extremist" who was too dangerous to keep out of government.

The entire present government is full of extremists. Nobody seemed to care, and those who happily voted for them should each personally apologize to Hunsperger.

Yet the practical effect of Clinton’s political victory, in a phrase of the time, was to “define deviancy down.” He had changed the boundaries of the ethically acceptable — in the character we expect from a president and in the behavior of powerful men toward young women in their employ. In the end, Clinton stood; standards fell.

But if Clinton succeeds, it would expand the boundaries of the permissible. It would again define deviancy down. Americans would have rewarded, or at least ignored, defiant secrecy and the destruction of documents. Future presidential candidates and campaign advisers would take note. Americans would have rewarded a skate along the ethical boundaries of money and influence. Future donors would see a green light, no matter what candidate Clinton says about campaign finance reform.